Will there be a difference? CD reproduction and sources.

[Vacceo]

I would like to ask about potential differences depending on source.

I play CD's on my PC by means of a USB Blu ray player. The PC sends the signal, by HDMI to a Denon AVR.

I assume the decoding is the AVR's DAC, not on the PC DAC.

If I used a transport connected to the AVR, would there be changes on the digital signal path to what I am doing currently?

If so, would those changes be audible?

The bottom line of this question is quite evident: will I benefit from getting a CD transport or is it not worth it?

 

[LTig]

In theory there should be no difference in SQ. However I've seen measurements of HDMI inputs with much higher jitter than via SPDIF or USB. On the other side almost all Bluray players have an SPDIF outpuT (coax or Toslink) so you can use this one and compare it with HDMI.

 

[DVDdoug]

There will be no difference.

I assume the decoding is the AVR's DAC, not on the PC DAC.

Correct. A DAC is a digital-to-analog converter so you'd need an analog connection to use the computers' DAC.

I play CD's on my PC by means of a USB Blu ray player. The PC sends the signal, by HDMI to a Denon AVR.

Of course it would be more convenient to "rip" the CDs and store them as FLAC (lossless) on your hard drive. (Of course WAV is lossless too but metadata tagging isn't as-well supported as any of the compressed files, and with FLAC your files will be almost half the size.

 

[antcollinet]

I would like to ask about potential differences depending on source.

I play CD's on my PC by means of a USB Blu ray player. The PC sends the signal, by HDMI to a Denon AVR.

I assume the decoding is the AVR's DAC, not on the PC DAC.

If I used a transport connected to the AVR, would there be changes on the digital signal path to what I am doing currently?

If so, would those changes be audible?

The bottom line of this question is quite evident: will I benefit from getting a CD transport or is it not worth it?

Any differneces are most likely inaudible. As pointed out by @LTig there could be jitter improvements, but if the DAC in your AVR is even vaguely competent these won't be audible.

 

[Vacceo]

In theory there should be no difference in SQ. However I've seen measurements of HDMI inputs with much higher jitter than via SPDIF or USB. On the other side almost all Bluray players have an SPDIF outpuT (coax or Toslink) so you can use this one and compare it with HDMI.

I cannot connect a Pioneer BDR-XS07UHD to an AVR directly as it only has a USB jack.

What I can test is the HDMI and the Toslink difference. However, with the Toslink I think the sound would pass through the PC DAC first (or not, maybe I'm getting all wrong) and then the AVR DAC. With the HDMI on the GPU, the advantage is that the sound info I deliver is not restricted in terms of channels, hence making the PC a good way not bypass any streamer or Bluetooth transceiver.

As you can see, I am asking because I see no point on buying redundant gear such as CD transports or streamers if I am not getting any measurable and audible improvement.

 

[antcollinet]

I cannot connect a Pioneer BDR-XS07UHD to an AVR directly as it only has a USB jack.

What I can test is the HDMI and the Toslink difference. However, with the Toslink I think the sound would pass through the PC DAC first (or not, maybe I'm getting all wrong) and then the AVR DAC. With the HDMI on the GPU, the advantage is that the sound info I deliver is not restricted in terms of channels, hence making the PC a good way not bypass any streamer or Bluetooth transceiver.

As you can see, I am asking because I see no point on buying redundant gear such as CD transports or streamers if I am not getting any measurable and audible improvement.

Tos link is digital and hence does not use the PC Dac (Digital to analogue converter)

 

[ThatM1key]

I play CD's on my PC by means of a USB Blu ray player. The PC sends the signal, by HDMI to a Denon AVR.

It's better to rip the CDs and then play them back digitally then to play a CD. I assume your AVR is modern, so I would just recommended ripping your CDs, putting them on a flash drive and plugging into the front of your AVR. Sit back, relax and select your album at that tap of a button instead of switching CDs in and out like its 1983.

I assume the decoding is the AVR's DAC, not on the PC DAC.

When using Digital, yes.

If I used a transport connected to the AVR, would there be changes on the digital signal path to what I am doing currently?

Man this is hard to put my thought on paper. HDMI out of your GPU does a great job and most likely has less jitter than a good chunk of transports out there.

If so, would those changes be audible?

Even if there was a transport that had less Jitter then your GPU's HDMI, you wouldn't hear a difference at all.

The bottom line of this question is quite evident: will I benefit from getting a CD transport or is it not worth it?

A transport would be a huge waste of money. Use the money towards some new/vintage CDs or even some better speakers.

 

[Vacceo]

If by modern you mean 2007, yes, the AVR is modern.

It is a Denon AVR 2808, so probably anything today will work better. I am planning to upgrade soon, to a purifi or hypex based amp. Anything decent running on HDMI 2.1 will top of the amp.

As you can see, I am trying to get as much use as I can, so not spending on components I can use already is a good idea.

 

[TimF]

Are you certain that you are streaming a digital signal to the AVR? Have you explicitly set up the PC output for such? Is it possible to be sending an analogue signal that is being passed through the preamp and amp in the AVR which is possibly the default mode (and thereby being mistaken about the mode of playback?

 

[Vacceo]

Yeah, the PC is set to use HDMI as output. When I test the seven channels, it detects the right speakers.

 

[billyjoebob]

It's better to rip the CDs and then play them back digitally then to play a CD. I assume your AVR is modern, so I would just recommended ripping your CDs, putting them on a flash drive and plugging into the front of your AVR. Sit back, relax and select your album at that tap of a button instead of switching CDs in and out like its 1983.

When you say its better.....
Better in what sense?
Better sounding , or just more convenient?

 

[ThatM1key]

When you say its better.....
Better in what sense?
Better sounding , or just more convenient?

Both

 

[billyjoebob]

Both

Ok.

In what possible way can a copy have higher fidelity than an original.
I understand a copy being exactly that, a copy.
In a forum where most will say that the mp3 is indistinguishable from the flac.
Where do you get this information?
Please, please, please tell me how what you say is even remotely possible!

 

[Chrispy]

Many "differences" can be atributed to slight differences in level, so actual level matching (not just the same master volume setting) can be part of it at least. Let alone other issues....

 

[ThatM1key]

Ok.

In what possible way can a copy have higher fidelity than an original.
I understand a copy being exactly that, a copy.
In a forum where most will say that the mp3 is indistinguishable from the flac.
Where do you get this information?
Please, please, please tell me how what you say is even remotely possible!

When I meant by "sounding better", I meant sounding a bit better due to error correction. Technically speaking, ripping a CD with proper software and settings can result in a bit-for-bit error-free perfect copy of a CD versus playing a CD in a player that has on-the-fly error correction, which can be audible at times depending on how bad the CD is. This information comes from others around the forum. Some members have ripped there entire CD collections and then dumped there CD collection.

 

[Chrispy]

When I meant by "sounding better", I meant sounding a bit better due to error correction. Technically speaking, ripping a CD with proper software and settings can result in a bit-for-bit error-free perfect copy of a CD versus playing a CD in a player that has on-the-fly error correction, which can be audible at times depending on how bad the CD is. This information comes from others around the forum. Some members have ripped there entire CD collections and then dumped there CD collection.

Got some examples of such recordings that are so handicapped partcularly? While I do rip my cds to flac this isn't an issue that I'd call an "issue"

 

[ThatM1key]

Got some examples of such recordings that are so handicapped partcularly? While I do rip my cds to flac this isn't an issue that I'd call an "issue"

I don't know what you mean.

 

[restorer-john]

Technically speaking, ripping a CD with proper software and settings can result in a bit-for-bit error-free perfect copy of a CD versus playing a CD in a player that has on-the-fly error correction, which can be audible at times depending on how bad the CD is.

If there's errors on the disc that cannot be corrected, linear interpolation is the next step and then muting. In that order.

Error correction is just that. The data after error correction is perfect. No errors. If the data cannot be perfectly corrected, interpolation makes a 'best guess' using samples before and after the uncorrectable error to fill in the missing/damaged data. You rarely hear interpolation unless it is on the verge of or is starting to mute. Muting can be in the mS range, right up to several seconds or more.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. A really good CD player will outperform any CD/DVD drive and software when it comes to damaged or out of spec CDs. Go put a few 2mm wide strips of black tape over a music CD (radially) and try to extract the data on your computer. A good CD player will play that disc, completely error free- in real time.

 

[Doodski]

Go put a few 2mm wide strips of black tape over a music CD (radially)

That certainly saves on purchasing that CDN $450 Philips calibration CD with the laser etching marks on it.

 

[ThatM1key]

If there's errors on the disc that cannot be corrected, linear interpolation is the next step and then muting. In that order.

Error correction is just that. The data after error correction is perfect. No errors. If the data cannot be perfectly corrected, interpolation makes a 'best guess' using samples before and after the uncorrectable error to fill in the missing/damaged data. You rarely hear interpolation unless it is on the verge of or is starting to mute. Muting can be in the mS range, right up to several seconds or more.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. A really good CD player will outperform any CD/DVD drive and software when it comes to damaged or out of spec CDs. Go put a few 2mm wide strips of black tape over a music CD (radially) and try to extract the data on your computer. A good CD player will play that disc, completely error free- in real time.

I don't really trust my Magnavox/Philips CD-610 when it comes to error correction.