TEST: Do all CD transports & players sound the same?

For many people the compact disc pick-up will generate the same digital signal regardless the transport, relegating the difference of sound to the DAC. A smaller group thinks that any player will sound the same to any other, meaning that the internal DAC and the rest of the electronics have no impact on sound. Let's try to discover what is true and what is false in this video. Buckle-up!
Majority DVD-CD player (affiliation links):
US: amzn.to/4bpoQBN
UK: amzn.to/4dI2Bsp
IT: amzn.to/44V5TEU
LINKS:
HDCD video: • HDCD: Compact Disc at ...
Ayon video: • Ayon CD-35 II: My new ...
D200 video: • The T+A DAC D200 Revol...
Digital disease video: • The Digital Disease: W...
Test tracks download:
u.pcloud.link/publink/show?co...
INDEX:
0:00 - Intro
1:47 - The cheap player
3:39 - The quality player
3:57 - The DAC
4:22 - Test transport intro
6:23 - Track A (transport)
7:20 - Track B (transport)
8:15 - Test results & conclusions
12:22 - Test player intro
14:51 - Track A (player)
15:47 - Track B (player)
16:43 - Test results & conclusions
More Ana[dia]log groove:
INSTAGRAM: / ana.dia.log
FACEBOOK: / anadialog1
X: / anadialog
#cdtransports #cdplayer #cds

[@anadialog]

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!

[@net_news]

please put them in a second video!!! 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@garygranato9164]

i was about to suggest that you try something with the legendary philips CDM1, but looks like you got that base covered. :)

[@dirkbusche54]

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?

[@jayem1826]

CD 94? I had a CD 95 that I loved. Belts kept malfunctioning. Had to give up

[@yieldtothenight]

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.

[@nelsondesilva3916]

I have to say that this was probably the most brutally honest video review I've ever seen on KZbin. Well done, well done indeed.

[@alvarosundfeld]

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.

[@arekw7388]

@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!

[@anadialog]

Nice!

[@PrPr-mo4wj]

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.

[@BaileyWiggebutt]

Solid advice. I did something similar, not extensive, and came to the same conclusion.

[@jeffhunter4395]

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.

[@AndyBHome]

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.

[@ThinkingBetter]

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]

​@@ThinkingBetter And spinner mechanical noises...

[@ThinkingBetter]

@@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).

[@allanjacks7147]

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.

[@jasejj]

The whole transport thing was from the days when CD mechs were prone to jitter, which can destroy the stereo imaging. The old SPDIF connectors are asynchronous as well which adds to this problem - a traditional DAC will generally sound better if tied to the CD player via i2c which is clock-synched. Modern DACs reclock the input signal though, so there should be no difference.

[@MikeDS49]

Agreed. After what year would be considered modern? the early 2000s? I can't see how any transport feeding a DAC with buffered data and an internal clock would sound different from any other. It's the same bits played at the same rate.

[@danielpudvay1486]

If Modern DAC's are reclocked, how could there be any difference in the sound?

[@jasejj]

@@danielpudvay1486 Exactly my point. Any differences between any digital sources when connected to modern DACs would only be a function of the decoding (which could potentially differ if it's a non-PCM file, ie not raw CD audio), and differences in the DACs' analogue front-end and buffering circuitries. In other words, if the (modern) DAC is doing its job correctly, and both players are reading the bits correctly within certain clock tolerances, there should be no difference at all between a $20 DVD player and a $20,000 transport. As for what constitutes "modern", I'd say anything that is capable of multiple bit depth and >48kHz would qualify - anything designed in the last 20 years certainly.

[@MikeDS49]

I'm thinking about how the transport itself could have an effect in the sound, but yes about the DACs too.

[@danielpudvay1486]

My thoughts exactly. If there is error free transmission of the data from the source to the DAC, and the DAC buffers and retimes the data before conversion, the transport shouldn’t make any difference in the output sound. A couple of caveats, a poor transport might have loud spinning noise that is annoying, and there is the spousal approval factor of how it looks.

[@brianchapman5001]

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!

[@Mr_J_J]

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!

[@trevorbartram5473]

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.

[@toulcaz31]

Very interesting video. With the number of people watching KZbin 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.

[@alphaniner3770]

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.

[@benpit2762]

Speechless Guido, thanks for being honest. My previous modest CDP (Denon) died after 11 years and replaced it with an entry level Marantz CDP since I already own other Marantz products and also knowing that I’d bypass the internal DAC with a dedicated DAC. Results? Happy 😊

[@edipugurzehebi]

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. 🙏

[@joejoejoejoejoejoe4391]

You could get two 40 euro players, just in case one goes wrong.

[@musiclassica]

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]

Thanks! Glad you did and in person it is even more noticeable but…not enough IMO, not for that kind of money

[@musiclassica]

@@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)

[@corneliusvanwright4540]

Thank you for your honesty. I do hear a difference between an inexpensive cd player as a transport and a better player as a transport (both I own) but you are right the difference do not justify the extreme price differences sometimes. But it is up to the individual how much is it worth for one’s long term preferences. I find that over time I do appreciate the one I invested more in because it does sound fuller. Again I own both. Thanks once more for putting yourself out there. It’s not easy.

[@user-du1yk7uk9v]

Bravo Guido! I have listened to LOTS of cd players ...there were a few differences sometimes but always VERY subtle.

[@jaakanshorter]

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.

[@jondu-sud274]

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 !

[@kfl611]

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.........

[@middleearthltd]

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.

[@m.l.7356]

Thanks for sharing us your audiophile learning path… but most for all for your brave honesty!!! Regards.

[@johns9349]

As always, your videos are excellent. This was very helpful.

[@mircobalzano2455]

No surprise. Thanks Guido to share your experience.

[@jukingeo]

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!

[@themotownboy1]

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!

[@SastusBulbas1]

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.

[@elbebe1000]

Sir. Just you won a huge credibility. Hosnet youtuber as you we need in this world. Thank you for your output about this topic.

[@DanClapp]

Really enjoyed this one :D You may have just convinced me to pick up this little DVD player, but I'm still on the lookout for a good dac. I'm a little confused about the output though: You use the HDMI as a digital out, and then connect that to your dac?

[@anadialog]

Yes, fortunately the T+A D200 has a HDMI input only for audio.

[@HTimm-gz9mk]

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. 👂😭

[@BC-qb7tx]

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.

[@Darrylizer1]

Did the same but with a Macbook Pro and a Cambridge DAC Magic. The difference was substantial.

[@Jorge-Fernandez-Lopez]

This review is a rare gem in this hobby. Thank you.

[@gantchogantchev6554]

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.

[@patbarr1351]

Each CD player I've lived with has had a distinct personality. I remember being excited to pick up a Sony SACD player in the early 2000's for about $150, but I never thought it sounded as good as my old Harmon/Kardon CD player from 1996. I now have a Pro-ject RS (a rare beast) hooked to the Chord Mojo DAC. I also have a Woo Fireflies headphone amp (2nd gen) with a built-in DAC. I decided to try the new Woo by itself one evening & was astonished by how much different it sounded from the Mojo (music sounded distant & less exciting). I never used the Woo's DAC again.

[@markovlasic1978]

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.

[@Luvdac62]

Great video. Right on time as I was looking to get a transport. What cable did you use to output the digital audio from the HDMI output?

[@anadialog]

The hdmi cable that came with the player

[@jazzboy]

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.

[@martincosby9743]

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).

[@anadialog]

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: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eKqmnYmHmturp9Esi=PN8n4DDK5JMtGhRX

[@stephenfleschler9682]

@@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.

[@Voidoid77]

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).

[@joejoejoejoejoejoe4391]

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.

[@Blacktearlazyqueen]

So cool. So good. Its your strength that links me to your channel. Thanx man. MfG

[@christophmartin5381]

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.

[@robertwoodward9231]

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.

[@user-bs3yp9px3q]

I was thinking of upgrading my cd player to black ice audio cd transport with its internal tube dac, you should contact them they'll probably send you one to test. Bought some of their products which blew me away , it wasnt even subtle, and not that expensive in comparison to other products. Good testing you did there , interesting.

[@anadialog]

I went on their site, very interesting products at a very good price!

[@margherito]

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.

[@dab9742]

The main problem is that low-end appliances are noisy, you can often hear the mechanism turning !

[@carlosgarcia8508]

Hi Guido, interesting video, I wanted to ask you how did you send the digital signal from the low cost player (no spdif output?) to the DAC, thanks for your work!

[@anadialog]

Thanks Carlos, as explained in the video I used the HDMI output since the T+A D200 has a dedicated input.

[@codygrayland]

Very interesting, Guido. Thank you for sharing.

[@geomorphdog]

I really appreciate these sorts of comparisons. Thanks! I wonder if there might be a greater difference if you found a track that one transport had difficulty reading. I had a case where my Apple Superdrive kept misreading a track differently on repeated trials. To get one good "take," I had to splice together several trials in Audacity.

[@budlaumer]

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

[@anadialog]

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): kzbin.info/www/bejne/fZ2YZ2alo9-qp7csi=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.

[@JumbleTasteSpinning]

So cd's are officialy makes a comeback. Amazing.

[@stighenningjohansen]

The first sane hi-fi enthusiast i have stumbled over, Thanks ;-)

[@alistairwilson5344]

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

[@anadialog]

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

[@alistairwilson5344]

@@anadialog As a wise man once said "If you want to listen to great digital, don't listen to great vinyl"

[@kfl611]

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.

[@williammanganaro2022]

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.

[@anadialog]

Thank you so much! Love “ear opening video” 😂

[@usersky007]

I wouldn't thought I would ever give a like to this channel and here I am, totally shocked, giving you a like! :)

[@Mikey120241]

It's very likely that both transports sound similar because the T+A dac is reclocking the digital streams.

[@Cantatos]

The ones and zeros might come in a different font that's about it.. I'm joking right, it's digital data it should sound the same.

[@jimromanski2702]

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.

[@gerihifi]

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 😉

[@earthoid]

What a surprise! I liked the Majority sound a bit better on the first test but not on the second. I listened to this via my MacBook Air's speakers (and its built-in DAC) so my results may be questionable. I should run it through my Ares DAC and headphones but I'm too lazy.

[@manueldi_77]

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 ❤

[@earlyNova]

Oops! While I'm a fervent supporter of "advanded" transports and players, in both cases I preferred listening with the Majority. 😧 On both occasions I found that Patricia Barber sang better, more melodically. Even better: when listening to the player with the integrated DAC, I felt that the Ayon was the B, but I still preferred the A. For the same reasons (vocals). I'm pretty surprised... (I didn’t download the samples, I listened on KZbin).

[@LetsRideIllinois]

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.

[@Chris-nd5se]

Thank you for your honesty in the video. How big was the difference between the 2 players when used as cd players with their internal dacs ? What about this difference relative to price ? TIA.

[@anadialog]

The difference between the players is much more noticeable but once again not as much as you would expect exactly because of the crazy price of the Ayon. This was not happening when I had low-mid quality gear. Differences were much more evident but they weren’t high-end players/transports…

[@Chris-nd5se]

@@anadialog Thanks for your reply. When you say 'this was not happening when you had low-mid quality gear and differences were much more evident but they weren't high-end players/transports', do you mean that it was hard to hear differences between low-mid priced cd players when used with their internal dacs ?

[@ora2j251]

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.

[@audioupgrades]

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.

[@anadialog]

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).

[@mr.george7687]

Very happy w/ my $500 Marantz CD player. Was thinking of buying a external DAC for it but not anymore.

[@karellen00]

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.

[@michaellitscher9456]

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.

[@Toki1908]

One thing I want to mention, the transport that use mediocre readers sound pretty much the same, the transports that use StreamUnlimited readers such as Goldnote, Project Audio CD Box RS2 T, or even a full blown mega CD players from Gryphon or Metronome that can also act as a transport, they make tremendous audible differences. So, its not the transport itself that matters, but the readers inside the transport.

[@adam872]

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.

[@mkfmkf55]

Very nice video. I would be interested in a test between a good basic turntable and a pricey one, both with the same cartridge

[@davidorrick63]

Great review thank you for your honesty have a blessed weekend

[@offbeatinstruments]

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.

[@Medulopes]

Thank you so much for to topic and doind all this comparisons.. An important note is that you bridge both transports using a HDMI connection. Could be a i2s connection? If so, let's consider you are getting a clean/purer digital signal than you could get using a USB or a standard SPDIF connection, whose will be more sensible to jitter also. A nice approach for a eventually "part 2" video would me another comparison using a digital standard coaxial cable, which may bring different results. Regards from Brazil. Marcelo

[@anadialog]

It’s normal HDMI. A feature that I greatly wanted and found on the T+A. Yes, pure digital rips from the DAC can be a topic for a new video, regardless the connection.

[@rogerking7258]

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.

[@anadialog]

True!

[@patbarr1351]

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."

[@dirkbusche54]

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?

[@roytatum9517]

Thanks. I enjoy your videos. I once compared a 20 year old CD player used as a transport vs an Audiolab 6000 cdt. The 6000 sounded better. I changed to the 7000 cdt later on and that sounds even better yet. DAC was a Schiit Bifrost2. Perhaps your excellent Dac made the difference? What is confusing me though is how did you choose your transport? Did you compare it to any of the ones you mentioned in an earlier video on transports? That was very helpful to me. $11000 is a lot of money when it seems a Cambridge transport may have worked just well?

[@tee-jaythestereo-bargainph2120]

I agree with you 💯 I have a 1989 Sony cpd 605esd $1k in 1989 used as transport only vs 6000cdt and cdt6000 has better rhythm n pace and Glare with 6000cdt wasn't as bad My Sony came with Bu1 mech one of the best made (later kss190a) my 7000cdt even better I a/b tested with Ares2 then I got 9000cdt ' which I will compare against new cdt7000 my results may shock people 😆 coming soon

[@anadialog]

Yes, I have compared it with the Marantz CD 94 MKII and my audiocom signature modified Oppo 105d. Results are similar, meaning that used as transports there are differences and the Ayon is always better but not as much as you would expect. I guess it’s the converter it’s the only novelty compared to the older tests.

[@baldmetalnerd]

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.

[@filmnarr163]

This price range is pretty low to make valid conclusions, believe me...

[@MrFrizz-pk1rw]

Starting with a Onkyo C-7030 which developed tray issues and some tracks skipping I progressed to a Cambridge Audio CXC v1 transport. This tray loading transport developed slight skipping problems with lightly scratched cd. Sound was good. The Audiolab CDT 6000A slot loader was purchased. I preferred this sound over the Cambridge slightly. I had no issues with skipping on tracks slightly marked. The Audiolab some how reads ahead and buffers the data. I just know it works and is a great. I purchased the Audiolab CDT 9000A transport. Tray mechanism. To my ear an improvement over the CDT 6000A. Also exceptional with lightly damaged tracks.

[@BC-qb7tx]

Before you are settled in your determination, my suggestion for a dac/transport test track is "Like a Mirror" by Morphine. There is a wide variation amongst dacs in their ability to keep that bass tight. Lesser dacs or cd players will make a total mess of it.

[@Hugh_Hunt]

Thanks for providing an honest reaction. Especially given how expensive your ION costs. (typed before you said its retail price O.o) But when you look at it scientifically, you take a digital signal off a disc, take that raw information digitally to the same DAC... how could there be a difference?! (electrical interference is the only difference) I have always been on the side, of 'a transport is a transport'; too many videos claim to detect their high end transport in a blind test; but they seem to forget it's a 50/50 chance, that they likely just got lucky.

[@patbarr1351]

I haven't tested for differences myself so I make no claims either way. There *could* be a difference. People ignore the fact that a "digital" signal is not literally 1's and 0's. It's a series of voltage fluctuations that the drive sends out based on its interpretation of the pits on a rapidly spinning disc.

[@Hugh_Hunt]

​​@@patbarr1351they did that, fancy CDs with higher accuracy and definition on the pits... No audible difference to the human ear. And the flucuations betweens pits or not... digitally... Is a 1 or a 0 ... A yes or a no. Which is exactly what a spdid is transporting over it's length.

[@felipebentopereira]

Hi! Do you use iem's? What would be your favorite brands?

[@anadialog]

I don’t, sorry!

[@davidcurry8440]

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 KZbin’er who some how finds cherry vintage stuff and who also sells high end stuff as well. The KZbin’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 KZbin’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.

[@johnlittletree875]

I liked Track (A) the best and I decided that before you revealed which was which. That said I really liked Tack (B) as well. I would not complain about either. The mids and lows where slightly different to me but again both sounded great. I typed this 8 minutes into the video. 16 minutes in Track (B) sounds best it has so much more mids and lows and punch vocals sound richer and more clear!

[@piet65]

Hi Guido, I appriciate your honest comparison of the two components, But for me not only sound matters but also the built quality. And there is a difference of light years, isn't it? 😉 But 11k to 35, ok - in this case I agree 🙂. It was probably as crazy feeling to connect the Majority to your T+A DAC 😂

[@anadialog]

Indeed!

[@mauanderuk]

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?

[@robertliskey420]

This brings back a funny thing, many years ago a cd player made a stereo magazine's list in the "B" category if I remember right, People were raving about the sound, the player? A 100.00$ or so one from Radio Shack! A man I worked with rushed out to get one, I could not hear anything special.

[@MrGorpm]

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.

[@d4sched567]

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.

[@anadialog]

Indeed that is a plus for a quality player/transport

[@RudieVissenberg]

Thanks for your honest video and I can see that you are really shocked. With the first comparison I heard clearly a diference between A and B. I was hoping the Ayon was A since it sounded much better to me. More air in the stereo image, more presence. With the second comparison I was shocked that the two were much closer. The Ayon still has more air and presence but less. I can totally understand that you are going to sell the Ayon. The price is way too high for this small difference in quality. I just wonder who wants to buy the Ayon after seeing your video 🤨

[@MohsinWadee]

My finding too

[@stephenfleschler9682]

I've tried probably 18 DVD players, CD players, PS Audio, highly modified Arcam Delta 2500, Shanling ET3, other transports and only the Shanling ET3 was acceptable. However, my new Jay's Audio CDt 3 Mk3 annihilates all. It apparently is better than the Ayon. It's a $5k SOTA CD only transport/weighs 48.6 lbs/top-loader (just for reference). This is played through Von Schweikert VR9 SE Mk2 upgraded speakers, with multiple DACs including the COS Engineering D1 and D2, a radically upgraded Emotiva XDA1 (power supply upgrade has 5 Sparkos regulators, analog only/no OPamps) and pending Lampizator Poseidon arrival any day now. Transports do make major differences. It's just that the lower quality ones are similar often played through average quality DACs. I tried something like the Majority (a middle rated Sony 4K player) and got inferior sounding results. I listen to classical orchestral, jazz, big band, rock such as The Who, Steely Dan and electronica such as Yello to test out the dynamics and bass. Simple music is not as good an indicator for differences. I've heard many good sounding systems play simple music like the test in the video but not many that can do the severe tests of my dynamic choices. The transports and DACs must do both for me. E.g. Magnapans and Devore speakers are wonderful sounding on voices and guitars but try playing Live at Leeds or a Shostakovich symphony at realistic volume levels on them and see how much you still like them. I used to feel the same way as this video comparison but was unsatisfied with my 16,100 CDs versus my 29,900 LPs. Not now and pending the arrival of the Poseidon, only better. For most CD listeners, this video is okay. However, my best friends who are not as well off fiscally are using Rotel and Denon 1500 CD players and they sound remarkably good (with Acme treated fuses replacing standard glass fuses). Another uses a highly modified Arcam Alpha 5+ as a transport. There's something about the older transports, particularly Philips CDM type that makes CDs sound more appealing.

[@anadialog]

I had the prior version of the Jay’s and sent it back the day after. I can only say that this DAC (the T+A D200) really makes everything shine but it is also probably smoothing out all imperfections.

[@stephenfleschler9682]

@@anadialog My retail audio dealer indicated that I should investigate the mid-line T+A digital gear; in particular, their CD transport. It is a drawer loader and is slightly more expensive than the Jay's Audio CDt3. I listen to many acoustic "78" recordings. Many imperfections become superfluous in a high resolution audio system. Record noise in my analog LP system is either low or most commonly, non-existent. Friends often don't know whether I'm playing an LP or CD. The worst problem in digital is the mastering that makes a recording less listenable on a high resolution system. Compression, excessive noise-gating, added electronic reverb, improper gain levels (too bright, too dull, lack of bass, too much bass) are the considerable problems of digital recording playback. When digitizing analog recordings, there are also numerous problems from the tape playback from azimuth, bias, tape shedding/splices, etc. to recalibrating for a pre-cut LP mastertape adjustments if necessary. I have found a significant number of recordings (I have over 55,000) on 78, LP and digital that were virtually unlistenable/not enjoyable in my less resolving former equipment/systems which were very good on good recordings but just elevate all music now. That is why an "hot stamper" LP are so much more involving than a 3rd generation cassette copy version (many foreign countries not of the recording origin received lesser quality tapes for making an LP in their own country). In music, I don't seek to smooth out the recording engineer's sound (adulterating the performance/recording). Better yet, in analog, the mastertape used prior to cutting the record which generally entailed bass cuts, dynamic compression, treble boost, etc. sounds better. Often, digital transfers direct from the pre-record cut mastertape is better. It certainly is cheaper to buy a well recorded and mastered CD than the equivalent hot stamper/early stamper of a record (I've purchased many more jazz CDs than very expensive LPs of the same title and find them perfectly enjoyable and sometimes even better).

[@kemeremir]

Hello how do we connect the hdmi to the dac , mlne has optical coax and usb the square one , did use a converter of sorts, thanks

[@anadialog]

The T+A D200 has a hdmi port, one of the reasons why I wanted to test it. Otherwise I made a video with some other solutions here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gXLUo2uDhZKcpJYsi=dAKop7_HuWGg7FjX

[@micksmith106]

Has an older guy with not so good hearing any more. listening to my digital music now, I tend to use a lot of EQ now. for the exact reasons that you mention between cheap audio products and the quite expensive units. It's the only way that I can hear a major difference in actual sound quality and acoustics now day's.

[@carmy1878]

In the second test the second track has a voice with more focus and is clear that it was the Ayon

[@jamesrobinson9176]

I was in the other room but I might have heard a bit of sibilance. Almost like a phono cartridge.

[@musicenthiousiast]

I was wondering if you only tried one type of digital output. Since 2019 I have been using a CEC TL5 as CD transport but previously used the Rega Saturn as transport. Both were/are connected to a Hegel DAC HD25 via coax cable. The Rega sounded far too analytical with the Wireworld cable while the CEC sounds analytical yet enjoyable. I had tried this several times over a long period of time and each time I found the CEC sounded much better. I had also tried another cable ( Audioquest Diamond) which improved the sound of the Rega but still did not reach the level of the CEC wireworld combination. The Audioquest sounded pleasant through the Rega but a little too slow and on the CEC you were not really carried along. It may be that with a different DAC the differences are different but unfortunately I cannot test this. In any case, from both I could distinguish the differences well. Have you ever compared MP3 with Flac , maybe these days you can't hear any differences here either with your current DAC 🙂

[@anadialog]

I have because the cheap player had only HDMI

[@matthewhilty4209]

I was able to hear a difference even over KZbin with not so great hearing and spot the AYON both times correctly. There was some siblance and compression on track B on the first set and lack of extension and dynamics on track A on the 2nd set . Similar though.

[@nc3419]

Probably the reason I don't spend tons of money on dacs. I have a Topping D70s and an Aune x18 with Sparkos upgrade and both do well. I get a bit more output than my Marantz CD6006 but also feel a bit better performance. These dacs did sound better than cheaper ones I had heard but wonder how much more improvement you get when you start spending more and probably dependent on better equipment in every category as well. BTW, some bluray players also impressed greatly. I hear bigger differences in amps, especially under a grand amps, but same with more money, marginal differences? Speakers on the other hand, sound different.

[@peterjamesmacneil]

I'm fully digital for awhile now, but I found software sounds different, my favourite playback is the TS2 by Ircam Labs. TS2 is pro software but well worth the effort as the level of clarity is above others.

[@ZeusTheTornado]

Just get one that has Wasapi or ASIO support, it doesn't get better than bit-perfect no matter the software

[@7AccordHomeStudio]

Guido will be the brand ambassador of Majority. Next week they will not be able to serve the audiophile needs. 😂

[@Ian-wh8ut]

same!

[@anadialog]

🤣🤣🤣

[@isyannnkarr]

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.

[@anadialog]

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.

[@dab9742]

In the VRDS era, Teac had solid aluminum platters, good steel, and the machines weighed over 10 kilos, like the VRDS25, for example, which was a marvel of construction ! 😉

[@Ashen2501]

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.

[@Mean_Gene_69]

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 😁

[@GiveMeMusic]

Even in the second comparison I don’t notice much difference in the straight from transport and DAC. I actually preferred the Track A on the second time around, which I believe is the cheaper DVD unit.