That's interesting. I hadn't realised that you had a PhD. Out of interest what was your thesis about?
PC > AVI Neutron Five 2.1
Sony NWZ-A847 64GB Walkman > Westone UM3x
The topic was about the quality of the copy.....and while an exact copy maybe possible a better copy than the orignal is impossible.
Of course you can't get better than the original, but you can certainly get worse......which is why CDPs themselves differ in ability; and why playing a perfect rip through a streamer, helps solve some of the inherent problems that CDPs suffer from.
"Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to keep going back and beginning all over again." André Gide
When you suggest CDPs differing in ability are you putting that down to the quality of the drive / read mechanism?
I hope you are not suggesting they are inferior to that cheap DWD-RW drive I have in my home PC.
Origin Live Aurora Gold+Illustrious Mk2 arm+Zyx R100-02/Stello CDT200+Stello DA220 dac/Tom Evans Groove Anniversary phono amp/Tom Evans Vibe preamp/Linear A power amp/Acoustic Zen Adagios/Chord cables/Oppo 105EU.
Yes, along with the quality of the power supply, isolation of components (from internal / external vibration, mitigation of unwanted resonance and quality of wiring and DAC.......but what do I know.
He used the plural, so it seems he has at least one PhD in 'engineer' and at least one in 'scientist'. So the question is, what were his theses about? And who did the spelling and punctuation for them?
HiFi / A/V / Bedroom
...I myself have phd's in engineer & scientist..
If I had a "phd" (sic) I would be sure to write it correctly as PhD.
Also I wouldn't describe the discipline/disciplines as 'engineer & scientist'.
Which branches of engineering and science? Mechanical? Civil? Electronics? Physics? Biology? Organic chemistry?
Marantz M-CR603 + AirPlay • Rega R3 loudspeakers • iPhone 5 • iMac • Apple Airport Extreme 802.11n • Apple iPad Mini • Panasonic TX-L32D25B • Sony BDP-S390 • Ruark Audio R1 Deluxe • Humax HDR-Fox T2
A right, so not just the read mechanism then, this is the only thing likely to effect the quality of a ripped CD.
Has he got an 'ology?? or two?
I'm not a scientist and I don't have a PhD, but I can grasp that a computer which is able to make mutiple passes at ripping a CD is at a great advantage compared to a CD player which does it on-the-fly. You don't need to know the science behind it for that to be obvious.
Main system: Mac Mini 2011 > HRT II+ DAC • Cyrus 2 & PSX • Cyrus tuner • MS 10i speakers [on loan]
Also cluttering-up the place: Thorens TD160 (no cart) • Marantz CD 63 mkII KI & PM66 KI • Technics SL-P777 • Nakamichi DR-1
Quite so Major. However, whether it needs to make multiple passes or not, you are not going to end up with a rip that is better than the original.
Yep, obviously that would be impossible.
I can think of a few characters on this forum who could have a PhD in psilology.
IME. A CDP's performance is the sum of its design, with the best I've heard being the £45k DCS Scarletti 4 box system (Transport / DAC / Clock / Upsampler). They make a big issue of their bespoke (and expensive) Ring Dac.
I linked to a concise view on the advantages of ripping and streaming, on the first page of this thread.
Had to look that one up I did.
Obviously not 'ology material!
© 2013 Haymarket Publishing