Some "interesting" claims by Pro-Ject re: their new CD transport box...

[SIY]

I stated nothing about the understanding of technology here.

Good, because you have no understanding of it. If you'd like to actually understand why this is a Russell's Teapot, and why people who DO understand the technology confidently dismiss the claims out of hand, there are lots of reference texts which we can suggest (especially Pohlman, or Nakajima and Ogawa, or Baert, Theunissen and Vergult).

Learning is not easy, but has rewards.

 

[JJB70]

CDs achieved audible transparency decades ago. I think there's something to be said for a high quality product in terms of durability and tactile feel or if you just like splurging money but if it's about SQ then CD players and DACs were commodised decades ago.

 

[SIY]

CDs achieved audible transparency decades ago. I think there's something to be said for a high quality product in terms of durability and tactile feel or if you just like splurging money but if it's about SQ then CD players and DACs were commodised decades ago.

Not to mention that it's an obsolete storage mechanism in 2022. My CDs are packed in boxes stored in our basement.

 

[Rob from Sydney]

Ever notice that uncontrolled listening and uniformly positive reviews are the rule in the audio press? Ever wonder why?

Wouldn’t know; I don’t read the audio press. No need to be so presumptuous.

 

[Rob from Sydney]

Let's humor the comedian.

Below a quote from marketing material from Project:


Read up on CD encoding (Eight to Fourteen Modulation, CIRC, tracking, focusing, C1, C2, and CU errors and their correction).
Then actually use a CD analyzer (costs of a small car) and see how many C1 and C2 errors occur and how many CU errors occur during playback using a functional (not defective) CDP and using not severely damaged scratched CDs. I have in my repair period.

Let me assure you C1 errors are constantly there and are fully correctable. C2 errors are far less common and are mostly also fully correctable or accurately interpolate-able.
Only when CU errors occur (unrecoverable errors) then samples are lost BUT it is known samples are lost.
How the player handles this (sample hold, interpolation or mute) depends.
It is what Project alludes to.

Focusing and tracking is mechanical (beam following the bread crumb trail on the disc) and is not the same as digital error correction.
The project is nicely built and the chassis has better build quality. That does not mean the read eye pattern is 'better' also.

Let me guarantee you that CD's handled with some basic care (so not terribly scratched or with 'holes' in the reflective layer) and with normal functionality do not ever have any CU errors so all bits are always recovered perfectly and timely.

You would have to understand that unlike vinyl playback is not an 'instant and direct data stream sent to a DAC' but all read data is demodulated, re-clocked de-interleaved, error checked (and corrected) and more processing is done (including digital filtering) before it is sent to a DAC.

So no matter how loud they scream what is claimed is nonsense and when it happens it results in 'ticks' or unwanted noises.

Reading CD's (ripping) via a computer is done differently (buffered and re-read at much higher speed).
Some things in life don't need to be experienced they can be reasoned and measured. Certainly in the digital world.
As a comedian you should know how you can manipulate people into going along and convincing people about things that may not be entirely true. Same here... marketing talk. People want (need) to believe. When they do the magic happens but may not come from where the think it comes from.

You had me until ‘let’s humour the comedian’ - what’s with the attitude and the ‘let’s’ - is this what frat boy mentality is? It costs nothing to be courteous and you should be ashamed of yourself. I am not a moron, I teach 4 subjects at college. Again my point, has anyone experience with the unit? The team that worked on the mechanism consists of some of the people responsible for the legendary Phillips mechanisms - at least they are making an effort, unlike products like PS Audio Perfect Wave that charge a fortune and utilise a generic $20 piece of crap.
I don’t believe that measurements are the whole story. If they were, everyone would use the same golf clubs and balls. If nothing else, it can come down to personal taste. For instance, I have lurked here for quite a while and read fairly ordinary reviews of the SPL Phonitor XE Headphone amp and the Schitt Yggdrasil DAC. Yet, I have tried many Headphone Amps including an Amp and Sound Nautilus and a Feliks Envy - but kept the Phonitor. I also had a DCS Rossini but prefer the Schitt. At the moment I have a Marantz CD6006 but was thinking of an upgrade. I was going to go for a Jays Audio as I only have Redbook CD’s, when I heard about the Project Box on Audiogon and SBAF - not in the ‘audio press’ as another of the condescending comments inferred.
I understand what you are saying but am no specialist in the technical aspect. I have 4 degrees and could doubtless baffle you with some of my arcane knowledge also, but what’s the point?
A reasonable response from most of the people here could be ‘sorry, but I am in the camp that believes the transport makes no difference’. See how easy that was?

 

[voodooless]

I’d be scared if those courses were:

- physics
- computer science
- acoustics
- statistics

 

[Katji]

- medicine

That's why, after years of hearing weird stuff from an [audiophile] who is a doctor at a state hospital, and wondering what field, what specialty, and then finding out he is a heart surgeon, I thought that it might be a good idea to avoid going to that city, just in case.

 

[Blumlein 88]

You had me until ‘let’s humour the comedian’ - what’s with the attitude and the ‘let’s’ - is this what frat boy mentality is? It costs nothing to be courteous and you should be ashamed of yourself. I am not a moron, I teach 4 subjects at college. Again my point, has anyone experience with the unit? The team that worked on the mechanism consists of some of the people responsible for the legendary Phillips mechanisms - at least they are making an effort, unlike products like PS Audio Perfect Wave that charge a fortune and utilise a generic $20 piece of crap.
I don’t believe that measurements are the whole story. If they were, everyone would use the same golf clubs and balls. If nothing else, it can come down to personal taste. For instance, I have lurked here for quite a while and read fairly ordinary reviews of the SPL Phonitor XE Headphone amp and the Schitt Yggdrasil DAC. Yet, I have tried many Headphone Amps including an Amp and Sound Nautilus and a Feliks Envy - but kept the Phonitor. I also had a DCS Rossini but prefer the Schitt. At the moment I have a Marantz CD6006 but was thinking of an upgrade. I was going to go for a Jays Audio as I only have Redbook CD’s, when I heard about the Project Box on Audiogon and SBAF - not in the ‘audio press’ as another of the condescending comments inferred.
I understand what you are saying but am no specialist in the technical aspect. I have 4 degrees and could doubtless baffle you with some of my arcane knowledge also, but what’s the point?
A reasonable response from most of the people here could be ‘sorry, but I am in the camp that believes the transport makes no difference’. See how easy that was?

The reasonable response from those who understand how the data on a CD is handled is the transport can't make the differences claimed.

Would you like to understand how that works well enough that you too could see that fact and no longer be bothered by the issues of whether or not what is claimed could be happening? Depending upon where you are starting from it might be a long road or not.

Many things not in one's area of knowledge seem reasonable when over-simplified. Often the over-simplification gets in the way more than it helps. Such is the case here where it seems quite reasonable that those who have used the Project would have the best information about it. However, with the claims being made they simply aren't possible and no first hand knowledge is needed to dismiss them. Is the Project CD transport a well made well functioning transport despite the marketing claims? It might well be. Or it might not, and until someone tests one you wouldn't know. Just using it to play some CDs for a few weeks isn't going to enlighten one on that point unless it is truly abysmal and doesn't work.

Without getting into the details the bitstream coming from a CD transport can't get 10 of 16 bits and function. The bitstream will fail, the lock on the SPDIF input going to a DAC will be lost it simply by design isn't possible for it to play music and work that way. What would they need to confirm such a claim....a transport that did that and worked which means owning a Project doesn't help at all. Of course they don't have any transport that works that way because by extensive design on multiple levels it simply can't happen.

Do you know how CD has the data recorded? A long spiral groove of reflective sections called lands and unreflective parts called pits. A transition from a land to pit or to pit from land is a digital 1. If there is no transition it is a zero. So the idea smaller bits might be harder to read could sound rather logical, but when you learn how 1's are defined you see it makes no sense at all. Plus the data for each sample isn't put in contiguous parts of the stream of land and pits. It is scattered about in a controlled manner. So that if a scratch happens it doesn't take out a long stream of samples it only takes out one and those on either side of it are elsewhere and allow for reconstruction if it comes to that.

Rather than point out you lack some understanding we could lie, pat you on the back and say "I don't have an opinion" or "who knows", but in fact it is known the claims are bogus. It is difficult to courteously tell someone they don't know or understand something.

Admittedly there is a bit of pile mentality on ASR about some things like the crazy claims by Project. And yes they are crazy. If you don't understand why their ad copy is more laughable than those for a non-prescription boner pill then maybe we appear close minded and jumping to conclusions. OTOH, this company is telling a whopper to try and get money from you. Not a little fib, not stretching the truth, not leaning on ambiguity, but a big huge impossible lie. Those companies aren't going to be respected too much on ASR.

 

[billyjoebob]

Not to mention that it's an obsolete storage mechanism in 2022. My CDs are packed in boxes stored in our basement.

I guess its all about YOU!

 

[billyjoebob]

Mariah Carey sounds fantastic. In your case you apparently have been listening with devices that only get maybe some of the bits, a bit over half of them. No wonder you weren't favorably impressed. Now if you hear the full Carey with all the bits with a Project you'll know what you were missing?

T>I>C

I'm missing alot of bits.....

 

[ahofer]

Admittedly there is a bit of pile mentality on ASR about some things like the crazy claims by Project. And yes they are crazy. If you don't understand why their ad copy is more laughable than those for a non-prescription boner pill then maybe we appear close minded and jumping to conclusions. OTOH, this company is telling a whopper to try and get money from you. Not a little fib, not stretching the truth, not leaning on ambiguity, but a big huge impossible lie. Those companies aren't going to be respected too much on ASR.

As someone said many years ago-

Spoiler: Concealed for mild vulgarity

Someday we will figure out how to get rid of spam email, but our dicks will be so big we won’t care.

 

[EJ3]

Not to mention that it's an obsolete storage mechanism in 2022. My CDs are packed in boxes stored in our basement.

My 78's are also an obsolete storage medium. That doesn't mean that I don't want to play them. They are stored with the rest of my vinyl, on the left & right of the stereo (as are the CD's & DVD's & other disc formats.
The little digital I have is on the desktop computer upstairs & is sent to the stereo via Bluetooth 5.0.
Do I want to digitize it all? Yes, for various reasons but mainly to reduce wear on the original physical media. Ability to reduce noise and EQ are nice secondary reasons. But I have other priorities at the moment, such as renovating a different home that we bought to will be livable so that my wife & I can move in. Then (a couple of years from now, I will start adding the capabilities to digitize & take the time to do it.
As of yet, I do not stream & may never stream. Then again, I may. So far, I'm ambiguous to it. And my other place is far enough off the grid that, unless the signal is from a satellite in orbit, I am unlikely to get it (thank God, a place that I can go to and can't be communicated with by people who don't also come to that area in the same time frame, some people live there full time [a hope of mine to do also]).

 

[solderdude]

A reasonable response from most of the people here could be ‘sorry, but I am in the camp that believes the transport makes no difference’.

This is Audio Science Review not Audio Science Belief.

I am in 'the camp' that knows transports do not make an audible difference as long as it is not defective or of poor design.
Of course some mechanisms+electronics can handle damaged discs better or can skip faster but that does not mean 'better sound quality'.

I am also in the camp that appreciates good engineering and design. Project seems to fit that bill. That does not mean it results in better digital signal integrity or 'improved' sound quality.

 

[Powerbench]

Yet there does remain a correlation, generally, between price and quality.

More like ego and price.

 

[Killingbeans]

I have 4 degrees and could doubtless baffle you with some of my arcane knowledge also, but what’s the point?

Spreading as few false hopes as possible. Sometimes the possibility of something being factual is so low that encouraging belief in it will be a disservice to anybody looking for information and knowledge.

 

[voodooless]

Making people believe something is far easier than having them accept facts, or as Mark Twain supposedly said: "it's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled"

Physicist Max Planck wrote that "the new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it". See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_perseverance

 

[ahofer]

Wouldn’t know; I don’t read the audio press. No need to be so presumptuous.

Apologies. When you said “has received positive reviews” I did indeed presume you were referring to reviewers, e.g. the Audio Press.

There are no ”camps” and the knowledge laid down here is not “arcane”, inasmuch as it is directly relevant to the subject. There are facts, often substantiated by controlled tests, and relevant science. People who hear differences in appropriately-designed electronics, let alone the more unlikely digital sources, have yet to make a case that the differences they claim are actually audible when people don’t know which component they are listening to. This makes it vanishingly unlikely that there *are* audible differences. Not impossible, but a solid assumption from a Bayesian perspective, and certainly a good bet.

Similarly, subjectivists have yet to demonstrate audible phenomenon that can’t be identified and described in measurements. Certainly our standard suite of measurements might be described as insufficient (for speakers in particular), but that is very different from saying that there are sound effects that cannot be measured along the known dimensions of sound/electrical signal with existing equipment that is orders of magnitude more sensitive than the human ear. If you wish to discuss *that* further, we have an entire thread dedicated to it:

Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

Seems like so many review threads get challenged with: 1. Measurements are not everything. 2. You all never listen. 3. I trust my ears, not graphs. 4. I don't listen to graphs. I listen to music. 5. You all must not listen to music at all. 6. Why don't you all buy the best SINAD gear? 7...

audiosciencereview.com